It's the summer effect.
People are taking a break from cryptos.
Every major pump which happened, it happened in November ( If I'm not wrong ).
Nah, what about the March/April 2013 bubble? But you're right that people are most probably taking a summer break or similar. When do you people think they'll be back and ready to throw some money at BTC again? I believe it could very well be late summer rather than fall already! The previous bubbles didn't started all in the same period of the year and when it happened was just a coincidence. There is always a real reason which trigger the rally, maybe the next will be the wall street big guys, who knows. |
|
|
|
Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)? I think it is to take advantage of the features of the blockchain. The blockchain removes the need for fee-charging middlemen such as banks, credit card companies (Visa/MasterCard), and payment processors (PayPal). Think of it as USD with a blockchain. I have no interest in it, but I don't see it as being a terrible idea. If you have physical dollars then you would not even need the blockchain (nor would you need to pay miner fees) as you can simply use your dollars to pay for your goods/services in cash. This is true, but what if you wanted to buy something from another country? Or from an online merchant? Using cash would be impossible in such circumstances. You would have no other choice but to use the banks, credit card companies, and PayPal - and you will get hit with fees along the way. This is technically true, however there is a much higher percentage of transactions that are done in ways that cash could be used verses transactions in which it would be impossible for cash to be used (all of your examples) |
|
|
|
By "we will need another $2,000,000,000 just to maintain current prices?" you're assuming that every single bitcoin that's mined over the period in question is sold. That isn't going to happen. There are a lot of people who will hold their mined Bitcoins for a long, long time.
I would argue that today, most of the coins that are mined are eventually sold on the market, as electricity costs are high as a percentage of bitcoins mined and miners need to pay their electric bill. The OP is correct in saying that ~$2 billion in additional capital is needed in order to maintain current prices over the next two years, however much more then that flowed into bitcoin just last year, and hundreds of millions have flowed into bitcoin via VC last and this year. One thing that the OP forgot to mention is that ~after this 2 year period is over the block subsidy will half again so less bitcoin will be generated ever day/week/year Its so funny how some narrow minded ppl are. They only look at speculative market of bitcoin and completely ignore the fact that..... $2 billion is NOTHING compared to an annual revenue of a payment network like Visa. And thats just one of bitcoin's features/utilities. I would argue that this is an example of how people can use statistics to try to manipulate facts. If the OP had mentioned that bitcoin's market cap had increased by several times his $2 billion figure just last year then what he is saying would basically be a non-event. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin faucets are trying to punish me for visiting them with a tremendous amount of Ads, most of them jumping out of the blue. My eyes don't want ot visit any more. It is not just annoying, it seems very unhealthy for the eyes. I seem to be one of the less visitor and still, they want me out or not?
Don't use it if it annoy you. I don't suggest using faucets to much time for the VERY little pay. But if you do those adds are what are paying for that little pay you get. It has been said many times on these forums, but it is worth saying again - you should not use faucets as a way to generate bitcoin as they will pay you well under minimum wadge and will not be worth your time. |
|
|
|
|
You are susceptible to a potential key-logging attack, as an attacker could potentially monitor your keyboard for your passwords for you wallet file and your mulibit password and then download a copy of your wallet file
IMO the most important way to secure your wallet is to simply keep a low profile and make it so not many people know that you are holding bitcoin on your computer. This will make it so people would likely not even try to attack your security setup as the chances of them finding bitcoin would be low.
|
|
|
|
The biggest illusion in these job numbers is that they're actually meaningful and upwardly mobile positions. Most of these jobs are minimum wage plus they're low skilled and offer no beneficial future moves to them outside of one proving they can show up to work everyday. So, college grads are taking these positions and there's almost no chance they can pay their monthly student loan bills especially if they don't live at their parent's house. Even former middles class workers who've been laid off for a certain amount of time are taking these low wage positions and it must be devastating to their lifestyles since there's very little room to save to enhance what's left of their retirement savings.
This is very much true today in the Obama economic recovery, however is not typical of most any other economic recovery. Our jobs numbers are very much skewed by a large influx of low/minimum wadge jobs and a decline in higher wadge jobs. |
|
|
|
When bitcoin did not have any/only a few merchants accepting it for payment, it was not competing with anyone. Today with LTC having no/very few merchants accepting it for payment, it needs to compete with bitcoin which has a stronger network and is not missing any features that LTC has.
That doesn't mean there isn't a place for LTC or other altcoins. It just means that bitcoin has the "first mover" advantage that ensures it to be the likely forerunner. Doesn't change anything. Each additional coin that a merchant accepts will cost some incremental amount for the merchant, if it is additional training for employees, for paying the LTC equivalent of coinbase, updating their website, or other costs. However if a business accepts BTC they will really not receive any additional benefit from accepting BTC and LTC as it is very easy to convert LTC to BTC on most/any exchange. |
|
|
|
The --help seems to imply there's no way to quit automatically, and without messing with the JSON API and whatnot, I suppose the easiest way is to start up at 3am, run for a few hours, then send a kill to the PID file, but that feels dirty.
If you're going to run bitcoin at 3am, why not do it daily? You can let it run for 2-3 hours, then issue a 'bitcoin-cli stop' and you'll always have the chain pretty much updated. Yeah, just do whatever cron is called on mac with two jobs, one to start and one to stop. Even this is much more complicated then it needs to be. The OP can simply open bitcoin QT and close it once it has synched the blockchain. This would take no more then a total of 30 seconds of the OP's time every week. |
|
|
|
Just hold, best thing you can do, if you sell and LTC price is going back up again you'll be very unhappy.
LTC is a solid coin, great dev behind it.
They may have good dvs behind LTC, but it still doesn't add any real features that bitcoin does not already provide to users and bitcoin is many times more secure then LTC is. The feature LTC offers is a secure blockchain. BTC got a secure blockchain and LTC will have a seperate secure blockchain when the hashrate have increased sufficient. That is were the the value in LTC is and why the value will increase long term. Features can be buildt on a secure blockchains, but are worthless on insecure coins (every other). If they both have a secure blockchain then why would you want to deal with the blockchain that is less secure (LTC)? Not only that but bitcoin is much more widely adopted and followed by the press, so any merchant that accept bitcoin would essentially get free advertising while a merchant that accept LTC would not. Think a few years ahead. To be a simple currency will not be the most important function for either BTC og LTC. But on the way there, merchants will have little/no reason to start to accept LTC as BTC works just fine, is more secure and more heavily adopted. |
|
|
|
Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)? I think it is to take advantage of the features of the blockchain. The blockchain removes the need for fee-charging middlemen such as banks, credit card companies (Visa/MasterCard), and payment processors (PayPal). Think of it as USD with a blockchain. I have no interest in it, but I don't see it as being a terrible idea. If you have physical dollars then you would not even need the blockchain (nor would you need to pay miner fees) as you can simply use your dollars to pay for your goods/services in cash. |
|
|
|
Expect flash crash in next days at least on 21th. Ever day after 21th there will be a small dump because of daily btc to usd swap. I am dumping right now first 200BTC
This is unlikely. The amount of BTC that would need to be sold as a result of bitfinex's new policy would be minimal |
|
|
|
What about loans that, after the money is spent, the money ends up in cash (as in paper fiat money) instead of funds in a bank account?
Cash is also on the bank's balance sheet. If a borrower takes a cash loan, then the bank adds this loan to bank's assets, and deducts the equivalent amount of cash from assets. For the bank it means that only the composition of assets changes, but this cash ends up in the economy, effectively creating money (and possibly a deposit in another bank). I think shaky was referring to someone takes out a loan for $1,000.00, spends that $1,000 on say a set of tools from someone on Craigslist and the seller of those tools doesn't deposit the $1,000 from the sale into their bank account but instead keeps in "under his mattress" |
|
|
|
The RMB is definitely going to be the next reserve currency and this might happen sooner than we think. The Chinese have heavily invested in the African continent and this will be on of the factors getting it there.
China is still developing as an economy and it would be much too soon to use the RMB as a reserve currency. The chinese government also subsidizes their own industries too much for this to be a viable option Yes, China have jumped to the second largest economy over Japan based on GDP. Its international transactions take more and more proportion of that in the world. So RMB will be used more widely in the very future. So some countries have already considered RMB as second reserve currency. The countries that use the Euro have a larger collective GDP then China does. I would argue that the Euro is more of a secondary world reserve currency then the RMB is today. The fact that China is know to manipulate markets and has strict capital controls would likely prevent other countries from adopting the RMB from becoming any kind of reserve currency. Exactly. Chinese currency is even more manipulated and controlled than the dollar or the euro. Changing masters does not free slaves. In this case the new master would be more sinister than the current one. We need a currency that is not controlled by any political entity to be economically free. But this is exactly why the RMB would not be accepted as a reserve currency. The dollar and euro are somewhat manipulated by their respective central banks, but only in the name of stability. |
|
|
|
Start small have a tiny precedent no one will complain about
But a precedent nonetheless to set the pave the way for making a larger confiscation in the future.
Not a good sign at all here.
That was my thought as well. Get people used to the idea by taking a small amount then take larger and larger amounts over time. Sort of like a progressive income tax but using time to dilate the process instead of progressively larger amounts from smaller and smaller groups of people. But the amount taken was very small, less the what Spaniards likely earned in interest in their bank accounts in one year so the net effect was essentially zero. The EU banks are still very questionable in reference to their health and may or may not be able to payout deposits as needed. |
|
|
|
Energy storage would still be important even in an ideal system as there will always be variable loads but generators gets the highest efficiencies at a consistent load. That's why I mentioned the hilltop land, if there's a competitive market for electricity then even without the erratic output of renewables there's still a market for energy arbitrage, buying at low load times and selling back at peak load times.
As to fossil fuel becoming unaffordable, it could happen very soon if some of the regulatory changes I'm seeing are anything to go by, a lot of european states are opening the doors to anyone and everyone that can come up with renewable systems. Energy company lobbying put a huge tax on Chinese made solar panels in europe but that's about the only place they've forced out competition lately.
By the time the generation born today reaches adulthood, China will have used up most of it's coal reserves making electricity, and many other countries will have run out altogether. The world will be a different place energy wise. There is little evidence that nuclear is going to save the day, that leaves solar, wind, an a bit of hydro depending on the country, fresh water which kind of competes with hydro electricity is a growing problem. Why would nuclear energy not be able to replace other, dirtier forms of electricity? Nuclear energy is near unlimited, very cheap, reliable and clean. Your other "green" energy sources are unlimited, however are expensive, and unreliable. |
|
|
|
This is an important step to take if you truly want to be paranoid about your wallet. This would only prevent an attack if an attacker was able to get control over the domain, but not the dev's private PGP key, and the public PGP key is found somewhere outside of the domain. If a user finds the dev's public PGP key on the same website/domain that they are downloading the file from then the attacker could simply change the PGP key listed and sign a message saying that their (malicious) download is the most up to date and correct one.
Well, it seems that at some point you will need to trust someone or something. But to minimize the problem of replaced PGP keys, I would publish my public key in all my public profiles I have. I think a better way for most users would simply be to search the forums for reports of incorrect code being on a particular wallet. There will enviably be people that will check the PGP key and check the source code to make sure everything is "on the up and up" and if not will report it. This would be much simpler for the less technically inclined. The problem is, exploits can go on for some time before they are noticed. In the meantime, everyone downloading the file and not verifying the signature is at great risk. This is true, however people will often report when they lose bitcoin as you likely see often on these forums and on reddit (if you read reddit) when people lose their bitcoin. I would think that if there was some kind of exploit on say Multibit for example that the community would be able to make this conclusion quickly when a lot of people report loosing their coins when using multibit. EDIT: the more technological inclined should still check the PGP signature and the source code on github for any issues, and when something is not right should report it and make it public. |
|
|
|
|
What this article forgets to mention is how terrorists will be able to turn their bitcoin into some kind of fiat that can pay for their terrorist activities and/or how their bitcoin can pay for their terrorist activities.
Bitcoin exchanges are very strict about AML and KYC so even if the ISIS were to get ahold of, say 100 BTC, they couldn't do very much with it.
|
|
|
|
By "we will need another $2,000,000,000 just to maintain current prices?" you're assuming that every single bitcoin that's mined over the period in question is sold. That isn't going to happen. There are a lot of people who will hold their mined Bitcoins for a long, long time.
I would argue that today, most of the coins that are mined are eventually sold on the market, as electricity costs are high as a percentage of bitcoins mined and miners need to pay their electric bill. The OP is correct in saying that ~$2 billion in additional capital is needed in order to maintain current prices over the next two years, however much more then that flowed into bitcoin just last year, and hundreds of millions have flowed into bitcoin via VC last and this year. One thing that the OP forgot to mention is that ~after this 2 year period is over the block subsidy will half again so less bitcoin will be generated ever day/week/year |
|
|
|
....
Background Refresher: Electronic money needs a way to keep track of who has spent what. We've had (technically) decent ways to do that using authoritative/centralized entities (PayPal, Square, Banks, etc) for a while. And since 2009, we've had a *decentralized* way to do that: blockchain-based crypto-coins.
RealCoin's Problem: If there's a central organization fixing the value of a crypto-coin, it is by definition NOT decentralized, but the whole point of blockchain-style crypto-coins is still to get *decentralized* global consensus. Thus, the entire concept of a a dollar-backed blockchain makes no sense.
....
It would not have a fixed value, but rather it would have a fixed amount of hard assets (dollars) that back each "coin" In theory the price of the coins could trade above or below one dollar and would be set by the market |
|
|
|
Coinbase has a recurring buy option from your bank account. You could setup a US bank acct and have your US employer direct deposit into that account. Then setup your recurring buy from coinbase to trigger after pay day. Your cost will be 1%.
Does that really work? Can you really fund your account from any bank account, even if it's not your own? That would be fantastic. What spainful is saying is true, yes you can setup a recurring purchase via coinbase. You need to fund your coinbase account with a bank account that you own. They will send two small deposits under $1.00 and you need to tell them what the amounts were. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
